Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

arm64/pmap: Add support for FEAT_TTL
Needs ReviewPublic

Authored by sarah.walker2_arm.com on Mon, Sep 28, 11:03 AM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
F176340765: D60090.diff
Sun, Oct 18, 1:41 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Oct 17, 4:45 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Oct 17, 4:44 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Oct 17, 8:11 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, Oct 15, 4:53 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Wed, Oct 14, 8:29 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Tue, Oct 13, 6:20 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Tue, Oct 13, 5:38 PM
Subscribers

Details

Summary

FEAT_TTL adds a Translation Table Level field for TLB maintenance intructions,
to indicate the level holding the leaf address for the address being
invalidated. This can reduce the cost of TLB invalidation.

Sponsored by: Arm Ltd

Diff Detail

Repository
rG FreeBSD src repository
Lint
Lint Skipped
Unit
Tests Skipped
Build Status
Buildable 78056
Build 74939: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

I think these TLBI_TTL_UNKNOWN values can specify the level, but it would be useful for someone else to check

sys/arm64/arm64/pmap.c
3020

TLBI_TTL_L3?

3719

TLBI_TTL_L3?

4763

TLBI_TTL_L3?

6017

TLBI_TTL_L3?

6036

TLBI_TTL_L3?

6107

TLBI_TTL_L3?

8441

TLBI_TTL_L3?

8936

TLBI_TTL_L3?

sys/arm64/arm64/pmap.c
3020

No, not this one. (This function is misnamed. It's suffix should be _ptp, not _l3.)

8107

TLBI_TTL_L2

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Thu, Oct 8, 3:52 PM
sys/arm64/arm64/pmap.c
460–472

I didn't see a reason for this change.

464–472

Aren't these backwards? They evaluate to a non-zero value when ttl is UNKNOWN.

2163

The prevailing style is simply if (pmap_ttl_support).

This revision now requires review to proceed.Mon, Oct 12, 10:41 AM